![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
I think its pretty quick for an A3, actually. Especially when you consider it came out in 2003, when 250bhp was quite a high power output for a 3.2 V6.
Golf GTI mrkV
- Thread starter real
- Start date
I think its pretty quick for an A3, actually. Especially when you consider it came out in 2003, when 250bhp was quite a high power output for a 3.2 V6.
Yeah its quicker than most cars on the road for sure, is it the same engine found in the R32?
Yes.
[TW]Fox;17937940 said:
Just the book figures don't seem that impressive for such a big engine, no doubt the weight and Quattro system play a big role in that.
Anyway bet it makes a lovely sound and a fast cruiser, strange having such a big engine like you say in a hatchback
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Mar 2005
- Posts
- 5,231
- Location
- The Voice Of Football
The Audi doesn't make as much of a noise as the R32 as it has a different exhaust.
same basic engine but different. runs a few bhp more and some very very minor difference, i'd imagine more to do with internal politics at vw group than anything else would be the reason for the a3 getting a few more horses squeezed out of it
246 bhp just over 6 seconds to 60 and tops out at a limited 155 mph
no it doesnt have Quattro, it has haldex. same branding totally different system although the op would be looking at mk2's with the 2nd generation haldex setup which is a fair bit better than the original system as per the mk1 audis and mk4 golfs/mk1 tt's etc
Not getting into a car war or anything here and I understand they are completely different cars, but my lowly 2.0 16V engine makes 0-60 timed at around 6.7 the 3.2 has a figure of 6.3 now the top end will trump my little pesky engine but to me it doesn't seem that quick. More of a refined crusing engine than a hot hatch something the OP is looking for?
A big engine like that in a small A3 would make the car a bit nose heavy and cumbersome, somethng like a Focus ST maybe better?
It's half a second quicker for a start - plus the Clio is small and weighs nothing.
0.5 second? Pahhh thats nothing in fairness haha!!
no its quite a large margin to be fair, and your clio is french, it wont reach 60 without some sort of electrical failure anyway so a pointless debate
Ermmm ok?
0.5 is what bumper to wheel distance from 0-60? Not a large margain by any stretch!
The engine in the MK5 R32 is identical to that in the A3 3.2. It's the MK4 R32 that was slightly different.
The only real difference is the exhaust which is tuned for noise on the R32 and "refinement" on the A3. In reality both are loud and both sound great.
The 3.2 model isn't really much quicker than the 2.0TFSI (due to its weight) but fitted with the DSG gearbox it is still rapid.
As the op sounds like he wants a car as fast a GTI but has decent levels of refinement I would definitely have the 3.2 on my short list.
erm no
lots of subtle difference from the audi to the dub
off the top of my head
engine maps
dsg maps are different((albeit thats not really the engine)
the audi runs a noticeably shorter inlet tract
different intake trumpets on the cold external side of the air box
i could fire etka up and give you a part by part comparison but my beers getting warm
its like comparing 2 cartons of orange juice one from asda one from tesco
their both exactly the same, but their not
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Mar 2005
- Posts
- 5,231
- Location
- The Voice Of Football
What does that mean in the real world then?